guildwarsfandomcom-20200222-history
Talk:Nayl Klaw Tuthan
Joke Name The name "Nayl Klaw Tuthan" (nail claw tooth and) is a mangled variation of the phrase "fighting tooth and nail". --Eudas 15:11, 10 May 2006 (CDT) Skills confirmed by SoC --Xasxas256 08:59, 22 May 2006 (CDT) I'm going to delete the last comment because there is no proof shown that it averages to be 1 in 10 times and the grammar of the comment is definitely lacking. I will add a note advising clearing surrounding mahgo hydras before killing this boss. Difficulty Actually, this boss is fairly easy to cap, compared to, say, mineral springs bosses. All you have to do is check if it's spawned to the right of outpost, run past mobs, kill the mursaat tower/jades, get rid of phantoms and there you have it. Piece of piss if you ask me. --Rotfl Mao 07:24, 31 July 2007 (CDT) Why this is not a reference to Alfred Lord Tennyson. *Probably the largest reason is that references used in Guild Wars are virtually always to pop culture; it is extremely unlikely that the designers knew their Romantic poets. A similar "reference" was attempted in the Eidolon article, see its history. It is just as likely that this is a reference to the Magic:the Gathering card Tooth and Nail; in fact, it's quite a bit more likely, since it is well established that quite a few Arenanet employees play or have played Magic. Elemental Sword. *The phrase given is not "Tooth and claw," it is "Nail, tooth, and claw." Given the order, it can be assumed that the designers started with "nail and tooth," or "tooth and nail," in other words giving it everything you've got, and added a third word to fit the theme of Hydra names. And what do Hydras happen to have, and in fact drop? Claws. *Alfred Lord Tennyson was not the first person to say something as generic as "tooth and claw," or "tooth and nail." To suggest that he is "universally identified with it" is outrageous. Animals have had teeth and nails, and yes, claws, for many millions of years, and they used them quite effectively and often in conjunction. *It's not a freaking reference. For those and quite probably many additional reasons, this creature's name is not a reference to any works by Alfred Lord Tennyson. I applaud you for knowing them, but you are wrong. 10:25, 27 February 2008 (UTC) : I was actually making quite long edit of same kind to this. <_< I agree with this though. J Striker 10:29, 27 February 2008 (UTC) Why this is a reference to Alfred Lord Tennyson. * "Probably the largest reason is that references used in Guild Wars are virtually always to pop culture; it is extremely unlikely that the designers knew their Romantic poets." Actually, it's very likely, given that anyone with a halfway decent education will name certain typefied statements from all manner of old, dead people, Romantic poets or not. People "know" E=mc² without understanding general relativity because it has entered common parlance. * A similar "reference" was attempted in the Eidolon article, see its history. It is just as likely that this is a reference to the Magic:the Gathering card Tooth and Nail; in fact, it's quite a bit more likely, since it is well established that quite a few Arenanet employees play or have played Magic. Very likely indeed. Perhaps it's a dual reference, which is exactly the sort of nerdery programmers love to engage in, even if the people playing their games seem to completely miss it. *The phrase given is not "Tooth and claw," it is "Nail, tooth, and claw." Given the order, it can be assumed that the designers started with "nail and tooth," or "tooth and nail," in other words giving it everything you've got, and added a third word to fit the theme of Hydra names. And what do Hydras happen to have, and in fact drop? Claws. See point above. I completely agree. How does this detract from the argument? *Alfred Lord Tennyson was not the first person to say something as generic as "tooth and claw," or "tooth and nail." To suggest that he is "universally identified with it" is outrageous. Animals have had teeth and nails, and yes, claws, for many millions of years, and they used them quite effectively and often in conjunction. No, but his statement "Nature, red in tooth in claw" was the subject of discussion here, so I'm not sure what your statement has to do with it. Certainly, anyone will agree that "Nature, red in tooth in claw" was not part of common parlance. I didn't say anywhere he was universally acknowledged with the phrase "tooth and nail" or any of the other strawman permutations you list. *It's not a freaking reference. Funny, but irrelevant. In short, any university is full of pimply, affected youths who will shout "Tennyson!" when presented with the phrase "Nature, red in tooth in claw". This is not really contentious in any manner whatsoever. What is odd about this is anyone's resistance to something so obvious. I suggest you send in a question to the developers if you wish to have this answered finally (and if you can stand the response). Failing that, constantly reverting the edit is equivalent to a shouting match and more than a little bizarre. Last point: you'll notice I said "likely", meaning I'm willing to discuss it without railroading anyone else to do so. Give it a try. :Anyways, the page should not be remained as it is after your edit, since the only one revert allowed was done by Felix and not you. So the article deserves to be as it WAS until the reference is confirmed. J Striker 10:47, 27 February 2008 (UTC) ::You have just broken GW:1RV, actually. This is a wiki, not a public discussion forum; we don't list information that is unproven without either consensus or sound reasoning backing it up. You have neither. If you would like to contact the designers, by all means do so. If they say "Yes, you are correct," I will give you my name and address and you can mock me in person for the rest of my life. For the time being, however, your "trivia" does not belong in this article. 10:52, 27 February 2008 (UTC) :::Ah, But I have not "broken" anything, as my reasoning is sound. I find this pissing contest distasteful and childish. I will send an email to NCsoft immediately following this edit. If they respond, I will post it. Regardless, I'm leaving your edit, as arguing on the internet is truly the last thing I'm interested in. Anatinus 08.02.27.02.58 ::::We're not arguing, but discussing this matter. And by the way, you may not receive any reply from NCSoft, as they're not in charge of GW in-game related questions as far as I know. J Striker 11:01, 27 February 2008 (UTC) :::::Son, it's not a "discussion" when no one has countered a single one of my points above. It's a shouting match with a group of teenagers. This old man doesn't have the energy for that. Believe me, I'd love to actually "discuss" it, but that doesn't seem to be the intent on here. Anatinus 08.02.27.03.07 PS - I sent the question in. ::::Firstly, don't call me a son. And secondly, I don't have time to copy-paste section above this one's over here like you did a moment ago to point out that you either havent 'countered' any of those claims that prove that this boss is not reference to Tennyson's work. Compare these if you have time. Nayl Klaw Tuthan This matches pretty well with following: Nail, claw, tooth, and as many users and players alike agree. Do you think this matches with the line; "Nature, red in tooth in claw" I don't have anything against such poetry, but I highly doubt that this boss has anything to actually do with that line. I sense fanboyism, as they aren't even similiar. J Striker 11:23, 27 February 2008 (UTC) :::::::The problem here is that you feel you're superior to us- reason given, your cells have been dividing longer? This isn't about the trivia for you anymore, it's about proving you're right. If you are right, what happens? The trivia goes on the page, the wiki is improved. Everyone wins. If you aren't, what happens? The trivia stays off the page, the wiki is one false statement less cluttered, everyone wins. This site is here to provide information to people that play Guild Wars, not to feed your ego. I'm not optimistic enough to believe that one day you'll realize the error of your ways, develop empathy, get married, etc., but at least you may realize that you have nothing to gain from belittling other contributors on a public information database. 11:27, 27 February 2008 (UTC) Here's some words; :We all agree that "Fighting tooth and nail" is common. :Similarly we agree that "Nature, red in tooth in claw" is a Tennyson quotation. :"Nayl Klaw Tuthan" is phonetically identical with "Nail Claw Tooth-an". (In the popular interpreted pronunciation) :In either suggested reference the words are not in the exact order. :If it is not the order that is similar then the connection is in the word choice. :Neither reference shares all the words (One omitting Claw, the other Nail) *The Tennyson case is weakened by the lack of Nature, which is vital to proving a connection and would have made an easy choice for the third name if this was the prime reference. *The tooth and nail case has a catch, it is the most likely reference because it is common (part of to-speak-ance) the same commonality however means that it cannot be attributed to anything in particular (Magic for example). :It is worth keeping in the article that when said the name comes out as "Nail Claw Tooth-an". From there, "Nail Claw and Tooth" is a reliable step. I do not see sufficient evidence for any reference beyond that point. Ezekiel [Talk] 12:00, 27 February 2008 (UTC) ::I wasn't intending to argue that it was a reference to Magic, just that it was equally if not more likely. I don't think it's a reference to anything. D: 12:02, 27 February 2008 (UTC) :::Well, in my opinion it only happens to ring quite nice with "nail, claw, tooth, and", but that's really all it's got. Like you said before, Hydras have of those and like to use them in order to tear their enemies apart(even though their fire magic is worse than their claws). J Striker 12:05, 27 February 2008 (UTC) If you want to ask Anet about trivia, this is a better place to do it. --Macros 12:42, 27 February 2008 (UTC) As suspected, I haven't yet received a response from the developers via NCSoft. I don't see the point of arguing over something so silly. I will, however, respond to two points legitimately raised: * I feel superior to my interlocutors due to my age - Not in any sense past my possibly more extensive experience with the phrase in question and with many people who would make a similar connection. Any tension expressed was incredulity and frustration at having what I see as a simple and innocent byline of information be instantly de-edited by people who by their own admission know less about Tennyson. As for "being right", whose edit was left last? * The missing "Nature" reference - Good point, and one which I had honestly meant to edit in (when I noticed the immediate aforementioned redaction) with a stab at an explanation: namely, a Hydra was, as far as I remember, considered a "Natural" creature in the TSR world of Advanced Dungeons and Dragons. As for why it isn't part of the name, I have two suggested reasons: 1) it is in fact a dual reference, the other being the Magic reference raised earlier, and, 2) there was no aesthetically-pleasant way to add "Nature" into the name, phonetically respelled or not. Macros, thanks for the other suggested contact point. I will try that as well. Regardless, I think the matter ought to rest until I can provide evidence. What I honestly do not understand is why the mere possibility of the reference is so aggressively excised. I did originally word it "likely". I could very happily have said "possibly" instead, post-discussion. Where does the apparently rabid anti-discursive tenor flow from? In all other wikis I've ever partaken in, such seemingly esoteric references are treasured and received gratefully. Not that I'm suggesting anyone buy me a fruit basket, but man, why the fanaticism? --Anatinus 08.03.02.02.27 PS - "Get married"? "Develop empathy"? Sheesh. Who's belittling whom?